London Elections: Turnout

Lord Shore of Stepney: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the percentage turnout of the electorate who voted in the recent elections for the London Mayor and the Greater London Assembly; and what were the comparable turnout figures for each election for the old Greater London Council.

Lord Whitty: Turnout at the election for the Mayor and Assembly for London on 4 May was 34.4 per cent. Turnout for each Greater London Council election was as follows:
	9 April 1964: 44.2%
	13 April 1967: 41.1%
	9 April 1970: 35.2%
	12 April 1973: 37.0%
	5 May 1977: 43.4%
	7 May 1981: 44.4%

DVLA Advice

Earl Attlee: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether advice given by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency is given on behalf of the Secretary of State, and if not, on whose behalf is it given.

Lord Whitty: The advice given by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency is given on behalf of the Secretary of State.

Special Vehicle Excise Duty: Mobile Cranes

Earl Attlee: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the purpose for which a vehicle used for pumping concrete was originally designed is relevant in considering for what it is currently "designed and constructed".

Lord Whitty: Under the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994, mobiles cranes are classified as special vehicles and pay a rate of Vehicle Excise Duty of £165. Schedule 1, Paragraph 4(5) of the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 states that a "mobile crane" means a vehicle which is designed and constructed as a mobile crane, and is only used on the public road in certain circumstances. Interpretation of the law is a matter for the courts, and the department's advice to vehicle keepers will reflect the courts' interpretation of the criteria in the legislation.

Access to Open Countryside: Impact

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What methodologies they intend to put in place to measure the effect of open access on the environment and on those who earn their living from the land.

Lord Whitty: The proposed new right of public access to open countryside forms a key part of the Countryside and Rights of Way Bill, which is currently being considered in another place. Although the new right will not come into effect for some time, the Government, together with key relevant statutory bodies, including the Countryside Agency and English Nature, are already considering what work might usefully be done to evaluate its environmental and economic impact.

Telecommunications Masts

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will bring forward tighter planning controls on the siting of mobile telephone masts in respect of health and environmental considerations.

Lord Whitty: In its response to the report of the Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones, issued on 11 May 2000, the Government said that they were minded to introduce a requirement for full planning permission for all new telecommunications masts, but would need to consult widely before doing so, including on the purpose and precise scope of any new arrangements. We shall issue a consultation paper on this and related guidance as soon as practicable.

Telecommunications Masts

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, to achieve a notional consistency of approach to health risk, they propose to place an immediate ban, similar to the beef bone ban, on the construction of mobile telephone masts of whatever height, whether in receipt of planning permission or not.

Lord Whitty: The Independent Expert Group on Mobile phones, set up at the instigation of the Government and chaired by Sir William Stewart FRS FRSE, has considered the possible health effects of the use of mobile phones, base stations and transmitters. The group published its report on 11 May.
	The group concluded that "the balance of evidence indicates that there is no general risk to the health of people living near to base stations on the basis that exposures are expected to be small fractions of guidelines. However, there can be indirect adverse effects on their well-being in some cases."
	The group's report does not recommend a ban on the construction of mobile phone masts and the Government have no plans to introduce such a ban. What the report does do is make some specific recommendations for precautionary action for the use of mobile technology. In its response to the group's report, the Government indicated that they accept the precautionary approach advised by the group and will hold further discussions and consultation on specific elements.

Telecommunications Masts

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will require companies to co-operate in making fuller use of existing mobile telephone masts to restrict the multiplication of such masts.

Lord Whitty: The Government's policy is firmly to encourage mast and site sharing where that is appropriate. Conditions attached to the use of powers granted to individual mobile operators by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, and incorporated in their operating licences, include a requirement to investigate mast sharing before seeking to put up any new mast.

Water Directive: Effect on Whisky Industry

Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What impact the European Water Framework Directive, if imposed in its current form, will have on whisky distilling.

Lord Whitty: The proposed EC Water Framework Directive is in the final stages of negotiation. Possible effects of the proposed directive on industry, including the Scotch whisky industry, could include tighter controls on some waste water discharges. The draft directive would also require a system of controls on the abstraction and impoundment of water.
	Implementation of the directive in Scotland will be a matter for the Scottish Executive.

Water Directive: Effect on Whisky Industry

Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What representations they have made to the European Commission on behalf of the Scotch whisky distillers on the current terms of the European Water Framework Directive.

Lord Whitty: The Scotch whisky industry has made representations to both the Scottish Executive and the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions on the proposed Water Framework Directive. The industry has concerns in particular about the European Parliament's second reading amendment that would delete a provision allowing abstractions that have no significant impact on water status to be exempt from control. The Government agree that this provision, which is contained in the Common Position text, is important and should be retained.

Incineration of Waste Directive: Animal Carcasses

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the cost to them of the Entec report on the environment and regulatory impacts of the draft Incineration of Waste Directive; and whether they are satisfied with the quality of that report.

Lord Whitty: The cost of the main Entec UK Ltd report of February 1999 was £32,970 + VAT. Entec UK Ltd also undertook further cost-benefit analyses at later stages of the proposal's progress, at a total cost of £20,935 + VAT. We were broadly content with the accuracy of the reports, but invited 36 trade associations (listed in response to Question 235/99/00) to comment by way of a check. We have recently become aware from the National Farmers Union that the number of small-scale animal carcass incinerators was significantly underestimated.

Incineration of Waste Directive: Animal Carcasses

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they consider the compliance costs associated with the draft Incineration of Waste Directive to be reasonable and, if so, whether this is in accord with the advice of Entec given in June 1999.

Lord Whitty: The main February 1999 report of Entec UK Ltd on the proposed waste incineration directive included an assessment of the "reasonableness" of the proposal in respect of different incineration sectors.
	Entec produced two further reports on the waste incineration proposal in June 1999, copies of which are in the House Library. One reported on the emissions standards employed in certain other EU member states, and the other considered the impact of the amendments proposed by the European Parliament to the Commission's proposal in response to its First Reading. The latter report also included separate assessments of the "reasonableness" of the proposed directive with the Parliament's First Reading amendments, and of the proposed directive with standards tightened to the same levels as those in the other member states investigated.
	We have broadly accepted Entec's assessment at each stage, and have taken full account of it prior to reaching Common Position, including our exploration of an exclusion from the scope of the proposal for small-scale animal carcass incinerators.

Incineration of Waste Directive: Animal Carcasses

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What measures have been taken to inform manufacturers and users of small incinerators for the disposal of animal carcasses of the effects of the draft Incineration of Waste Directive.

Lord Whitty: Copies of the various drafts of the proposed directive and the cost-benefit analyses DETR commissioned from Entec UK Ltd, which referred to animal carcass incinerators, were distributed as they arose to the trade representative organisations listed below over the period since 1994, as well as to relevant government departments. Trade representative organisations were also invited to meetings with DETR at which the proposed directive was explained on the following dates: 27 April 1994, 25 September 1997 and 6 October 1998.
	Association of Drum Manufacturers
	Association of Independent Electricity Producers
	Association of Electrical Machinery Trades
	British Scrap Federation
	British Cement Association
	British Recovered Paper Association
	British Biogen
	British Foundries Association
	British Plastics Federation
	Chemical Industries Association
	Combined Heat and Power Association
	Combustion Engineering Association
	Confederation of British Industry
	Electricity Association
	Energy from Waste Association
	Environmental Services Association
	Environmental Engineering Group, Open University
	Federation of Small Businesses
	Food and Drink Federation
	Institute of Waste Management
	Licensed Animal Slaughterers & Salvage Association
	National Farmers Union
	National Association of Waste Disposal Officers
	Oil Recycling Association
	Paper Federation of Great Britain
	Pet Food Manufacturers' Association
	Photographic Wastes Management Association
	Quarry Products Association
	Society of Motor Manufacturers & Traders Ltd
	TRADA Technology Ltd
	UK Renderers Association Ltd
	UK Steel Association
	United Kingdom Agricultural Supply Trade Association
	Waste Processing Association
	Water UK
	Wood Panel Industries Federation.

Incineration of Waste Directive: Animal Carcasses

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On what date they were advised that the draft Incineration of Waste Directive was to apply to the incineration of animal carcasses; and who was informed that the exemptions for incineration of animal carcasses were to be withdrawn; and
	Whether they have considered the proposal at the conciliation phase of an amendment to the draft Incineration of Waste Directive to re-introduce the exemption for the incineration of animal carcasses in small rural incinerators.

Lord Whitty: The European Commission working papers, the first of which was issued in 1994, and the subsequent formal Commission proposal for a waste incineration Directive of October 1998, excluded burning of certain waste by reference to Directive 75/442/EEC. Animal carcasses were among the wastes excluded but only if they were already covered by other legislation. The Council's Common Position text does the same. The Government's view is that environmental standards for animal carcass incineration are not covered by any other Community legislation and that, as was the case at earlier stages, animal carcass incinerators are therefore not excluded from the scope of the incineration proposal Common Position.
	The Council is currently considering the European Parliament's amendments to the Common Position, including those affecting the scope, at official level. Council's rules of procedure do not allow me to comment on the detail of those discussions. No decisions have been taken by the Council in relation to the European Parliament's amendments. We will keep the House informed in the usual way.

Constitution Hill: Memorial Gates

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the proposed Memorial Gates on Constitution Hill will create unnecessary traffic obstruction; and whether alternative sites could be examined.

Lord Whitty: The Memorial Gates will not create a traffic obstruction. The work to the road layout at the junction of Constitution Hill with Hyde Park Corner has been carried out with the proposed gates in mind and there should therefore be a minimum of disruption to traffic when the gates are in place.

Northern Ireland: Intensive Care

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they intend to take in Northern Ireland to correct the shortage of intensive care beds in the Health Service; whether one of the steps could be the creation of more high dependency beds; and whether they will provide any resources additional to those available currently.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The provision of intensive care and high dependency services was reviewed recently by the Chief Medical Officer for Northern Ireland. She has recommended that eight new intensive care beds and 50 additional high dependency beds should be provided to ensure that adequate levels of these services are available. Of the additional £53 million allocated to the Health and Social Services in Northern Ireland as a result of this year's budget, a total of £17 million has been earmarked for hospital services, including intensive care and high dependency provision.

Northern Ireland: Intensive Care

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the report from the working party looking at intensive care and high dependency provision in Northern Ireland will be available.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The provision of intensive care and high dependency services was reviewed recently by the Chief Medical Officer for Northern Ireland and the report is now available. I shall arrange for a copy to be sent to the noble Lord.

National Institute for Clinical Excellence: Northern Ireland Remit

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will extend the remit of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence to Northern Ireland; and if not, why not.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) has a remit for the NHS in England and Wales. Parallel arrangements for the production and dissemination of guidelines for the Health and Personal Social Services in Northern Ireland have still to be finalised.

PDVN Access for Peers

Lord Tanlaw: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	(a) how many peers or their secretaries or researchers, for whom they are allowed recoverable expenses, have an e-mail address on the Parliamentary Data and Video Network (PDVN); (b) what percentage of the total membership of the House this represents; and (c) what access points to the PDVN network are available on the Parliamentary Estate for those peers, secretaries or researchers who do not have desks.

Lord Boston of Faversham: The following information is correct as of Wednesday 17 May.
	(a) 177 Members and 40 Members' staff have e-mail addresses on the PDVN network.
	(b) The 177 Members with e-mail addresses represent 26 per cent of the total membership of the House.
	(c) In the House of Lords area of the Palace the following PDVN access points are available for Members or their staff who do not have desks:
	(i) There are six connection points for PCs in the Peers' Writing Room: three for direct connection to the network, three for "modem" connection (via the telephone network).
	(ii) In the Computer Office (First Floor, West Front) one PC connected to the PDVN is available for the use of Members or their staff. Colour scanning and printing facilities are also available.
	(iii) In the House of Lords Library two PCs connected to the PDVN are available for the use of Members.
	In addition, the PDVN can be accessed from all Members' offices which have been cabled. The majority of Members' offices in the Palace, and all Members' offices in the outbuildings, have now been cabled. All of the offices in 7 Little College Street and Millbank House will be cabled prior to their occupation by Members.

Immigration Services Commissioner

Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will announce the appointment of the Immigration Services Commissioner.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My right honourable friend the Home Secretary is pleased to announce that Mr John Scampion has agreed to serve as the Immigration Services Commissioner and Mrs Linda Allan has agreed to serve as the Deputy Immigration Services Commissioner. Mr Scampion will be appointed from 22 May and Mrs Allan from 5 June. Mr Scampion is currently the Social Fund Commissioner for Great Britain and Northern Ireland and a member of the Data Protection Tribunal. Mrs Allan is a member of the Police Complaints Authority.

Police Negotiating Board and Police Advisory Board

Lord Lipsey: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to review the Police Negotiating Board and Police Advisory Board.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My honourable friend the Minister of State at the Home Office (Mr Clarke) wrote on 19 May to the bodies represented on the Police Negotiating Board, and the Police Advisory Board for England and Wales, for comments on how we can improve the effectiveness with which these bodies carry out their functions. This is in accordance with Sections 61 and 63 of the Police Act 1996, which provide that these bodies will be constituted in accordance with such arrangements, made after consultation with the relevant bodies, as appear to the Secretary of State to be satisfactory.

Home Detention Curfew Scheme: Reoffending

Lord Lipsey: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many prisoners placed on the home detention curfew scheme have committed further offences whilst subject to the scheme.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The latest information shows that fewer than 2 per cent. of the 20,632 prisoners placed on home detention curfew by 15 May 2000 had committed further offences whilst subject to the scheme.
	Interrogation of data on the police national computer (PNC) (covering 14,646 of the 14,837 prisoners placed on home detention curfew up to 31 December 1999) indicates that, as at 13 April 2000, 351 of this group had been convicted of, or cautioned for, an offence committed whilst subject to the home detention curfew scheme, or had a prosecution pending in respect of such an offence. In addition, there are 44 cases where the Prison Service has been notified of new charges involving prisoners placed on home detention curfew in 2000 and prisoners placed on home detention curfew in 1999 who could not be traced on the police national computer. (The figure of 44 excludes cases where the Prison Service is aware that charges were brought but not proceeded with, or resulted in acquittal.) This means that at 15 May 2000, the total number of cases where the Prison Service knew of convictions, cautions or pending prosecutions in respect of curfewees was 395, or 1.9 per cent. of the total.
	Table 1 gives a breakdown of the offences which led to convictions or cautions or where prosecutions are pending. Table 2 shows the number of cases in which these offences are similar in type to the original offence leading to a custodial sentence, and provides a breakdown.
	Figures used in responding to previous Parliamentary Questions in relation to reoffending by those placed on the home detention curfew scheme (both in 1999 and 2000) were based on information about charges reported to the Prison Service by the police. The Prison Service had previously been notified of 171 cases where charges had been brought against offenders placed on home detention curfew in 1999, and 37 cases involving offenders placed on home detention curfew in 2000.
	The interrogation of data from the police national computer was undertaken as part of the continuing evaluation of the home detention curfew scheme by the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate. The evaluation exercise has not to date covered those placed on home detention curfew in the current year, but regular updates are planned.
	The figures obtained from the police national computer cannot be compared directly with those previously used in responding to Parliamentary Questions. The new figures are based on convictions, cautions and pending prosecutions, rather than charges reported to the Prison Service by the police. However, the figures show that there has been some under-reporting of charges by the police.
	This means that the procedures for notifying the Prison Service of curfewees charged with further offences have not fully been followed. These procedures are set down in Home Office Circular 1/99, issued to chief constables and police home detention curfew liaison officers in January 1999. The circular requires the police to notify the Prison Service either at the time the charge is laid or at the first opportunity thereafter. My right honourable friend the Home Secretary has written today to the president of the Association of Chief Police Officers, asking that the association give this matter its attention and identify what further steps can be taken to improve compliance with the circular. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary will also be monitoring actions taken by the police to improve compliance with the notification procedures.
	As a reinforcing measure, other agencies will also be asked to alert the Prison Service to any case that comes to their attention where a curfewee has been charged with an offence committed whilst subject to curfew. As already indicated, the police national computer will also be interrogated on a regular basis in order to monitor the effectiveness of the notification procedures, and to ensure that information on the numbers of convictions, cautions and pending prosecutions is kept up to date.
	Although more curfewees have been charged with further offences than originally notified, overall compliance with the scheme remains high. Taking account of the new information, the successful completion rate is around 94 per cent (93.6 per cent).
	The scheme is designed to ensure a better transition for short term offenders between custody and the community. Prisoners are only placed on home detention curfew after a careful risk assessment. The safety of the public is paramount at all times and with this in mind, prison governors will be reminded of the importance, when considering a prisoner's suitability for home detention curfew, of assessing the likelihood of reoffending whilst subject to curfew.
	
		Table 1 -- Breakdown of cases involving offences which led to convictions or cautions or where prosecutions are pending
		
			  No. 
			 Total 395 
			  
			 Manslaughter 0 
			 Other homicide and attempted homicide 
			 Attempted murder 0 
			 Making threats to kill 5 
			 Conspire, aid, incite murder 0 
			 Death by reckless driving 0 
			 Wounding 
			 Wounding (inflicting GBH) 6 
			  
			 Assault occasioning ABH 11 
			 Assault with intent to cause GBH 1 
			 Assaults 
			 Assault with intent to resist arrest 0 
			 Other assault 16 
			 Obstruct/resist constable 0 
			 Assault on police officer 9 
			 Cruelty to children 0 
			 Other violence against the person 
			 Cause explosion, place explosive 0 
			 Possess firearms with intent 0 
			 Possess offensive weapon 4 
			 Other violence against the person 4 
			 Sexual Offences 
			 Rape *3 
			 Buggery 0 
			 Indecent assault 0 
			 Unlawful sexual intercourse 0 
			 Abduction 0 
			 Bigamy 0 
			 Burglary 21 
			 Robbery 4 
			 Taking and driving away 2 
			 Other theft 94 
			 Handling stolen goods 14 
			 Fraud 11 
			 Forgery 2 
			 Drugs offences 
			 Production 0 
			 Supply 8 
			 Possession with intent 4 
			 Possession 30 
			 Unlawful import/export 1 
			 Other drugs offences 6 
			 Arson 1 
			 Criminal damage 19 
			 In charge or driving under the influence of drink or drugs 18 
			 Reckless driving 3 
			 Other motoring offences 34 
			 Drunkenness 0 
			 Blackmail 0 
			 Kidnapping 0 
			 Affray 7 
			 Violent disorder 7 
			 Perjury/libel/pervert the course of justice 2 
			 Threat/disorderly behaviour 4 
			 Breach of Court Order 13 
			 Other offences 22 
			 Offence not recorded 9 
		
	
	Notes:
	* One of the three rape cases was listed on PNC as pending prosecution, and is therefore included in the table. However, the Prison Service has since been informed that the offender was acquitted. The two other rape cases were previously known to the Prison Service and have been referred to in replies to earlier Parliamentary Questions.
	1. The table includes all 351 cases drawn from the PNC analysis and the 44 cases where the data is based on police notifications (excluding those cases where, following initial notification of a charge, the Prison Service was informed that the charges had been withdrawn or resulted in acquittal).
	2. Where a curfewee was convicted of, or cautioned for more than one offence, or prosecution is pending in respect of more than one offence, the table shows the most serious offence.
	
		Table 2 -- Cases where new offences are similar in character to index offence
		
			  No. 
			 Total 136 
			  
			 Homicide and attempted homicide including 0 
			 Manslaughter 
			 Attempted murder 
			 Conspire, aid, incite murder 
			 Wounding and assault including 8 
			 Wounding (inflicting GBH) 
			 Assault occasioning ABH 
			 Assault with intent to cause GBH 
			 Assault with intent to resist arrest 
			 Other assault 
			 Obstruct/resist constable 
			 Assault on police officer 
			 Other violence against the person including 0 
			 Cause explosion, place explosive 
			 Possess firearms with intent 
			 Possess offensive weapon 
			 Other violence against the person 
			 Sexual offences including 0 
			 Rape 
			 Buggery 
			 Indecent assault 
			 Unlawful sexual intercourse 
			 Drugs offences including 17 
			 Production 
			 Supply 
			 Possession with intent 
			 Possession 
			 Unlawful import/export 
			 Other drugs offences 
			 Driving offences 11 
			 Death by reckless driving 
			 In charge or driving under the influence of drink or drugs 
			 Reckless driving 
			 Other motoring offences 
			 Taking and driving away 
			 Theft and Burglary including 89 
			 Burglary 
			 Robbery 
			 Other theft 
			 Handling stolen goods 
			 Fraud 
			 Forgery 
			 Disorderly and Threatening Behaviour including 6 
			 Making threats to kill 
			 Criminal damage 
			 Affray 
			 Violent disorder 
			 Threat/disorderly behaviour 
			 Drunkenness 
			 Kidnap/Abduction including 1 
			 Kidnapping 
			 Abduction 
			 False Imprisonment 
			 Other Offences including  
			 Arson 1 
			 Bigamy 0 
			 Blackmail 0 
			 Perjury/libel/pervert the course of justice 0 
			 Breach of Court Order 3 
			 Cruelty to children 0 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The table compares the most serious index offence with all the offences involved in the fresh convictions, cautions and pending prosecutions.
	2. Similar offences are defined for this purpose as offences within the groups of offences shown. All "stand alone" offences are not counted as similar in character to any other offence or group of offences.

Kainos Trust

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will place in the Library of the House, and in the libraries of all the prisons where the charity Kainos Trust operates or where there is a proposal that it should operate, full information about the Kainos trustees, the address, telephone and fax numbers and e-mail of its headquarters, its annual report and accounts, and its objectives.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: I will arrange for a copy of Kainos's first annual report for the year ending 31 May 2000 to be placed in the Library and in the libraries of the three prisons in which the programme operates. This contains the requested information and will be available once the accounts have been finalised and audited, which is expected to be in July.

Kainos Trust

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will give details of any proposals by Kainos that the latter should give presentations on its work to prisons where it does not currently operate.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: Presentations on the Kainos programme have been given by a team from the Verne prison at Lewes and Kingston prisons; a further presentation is planned at Channings Wood. The purpose of these presentations has been to provide interested prisoners (who may apply to transfer) and staff with information about the programme. Presentations have been given jointly by a member of the prison staff, a prisoner and a member of the Kainos team. A similar presentation has been planned by Highpoint prison for Winchester prison.

Kainos Trust

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What information they have about the qualifications and experience of Kainos personnel working in prisons.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The employment of Kainos personnel is a matter for that organisation. All such personnel will be subject to standard checks into background, identity and reliability as well as the relevant security clearance before being allowed access to the prison.

Kainos Trust

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have considered the implication under the Human Rights Act 1998 of the requirement that prisoners who undergo the Kainos course must take part in Christian observances.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: Yes. Participation on the Kainos community programme is undertaken on a voluntary basis. The course is open to prisoners of all, or no, religions, and participation in Christian observances, such as prayers, is also voluntary. We do not consider that these matters would raise issues under the Human Rights Act 1998 when it comes into full effect in October 2000.

Community Sentences

Lord Dholakia: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the estimated likely increase in (a) the number of people imprisoned each year and (b) the average daily prison population as a result of Clause 46 of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Bill (breach of community orders: warning and punishment).

Lord Bassam of Brighton: We expect that the new proposals will be effective in persuading offenders to comply with their community sentences. In the short term, it is possible that there will be an increase in the numbers imprisoned. It is difficult to make firm estimates of the numbers involved, but if the new statutory warning scheme is ignored by half of those offenders who currently fail to comply without good reason on one or more occasions, some 25,000 additional offenders could be imprisoned resulting in an increase in the average daily prison population of about 1,900.
	The presumption of imprisonment for breach will not be commenced until sufficient prison places are available.

Spoilt Ballot Papers: Greater London

Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many spoilt ballot papers there were for each relevant constituency in the Greater London area, and for Greater London as a whole, for (a) the London Assembly elections 2000; (b) the European Parliament elections 1999; (c) the borough council elections 1998; and (d) the general election 1997; both in absolute terms and as a percentage of total votes cast.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The number of rejected ballot papers in each of the Greater London Assembly constituencies in the election of constituency members and the percentage of the total ballot papers issued is given in the table:
	
		
			  Number of rejected papers Percentage of ballot papers issued 
			 Barnet & Camden 8,743 6.47 
			 Bexley & Bromley 10,246 6.94 
			 Brent & Harrow 12,760 11.58 
			 City & East 18,853 16.02 
			 Croydon & Sutton 10,370 8.00 
			  
			 Ealing & Hillingdon 10,962 8.38 
			 Enfield and Haringey 12,105 10.16 
			 Greenwich & Lewisham 10,676 10.11 
			 Havering & Redbridge 9,386 7.93 
			 Lambeth & Southwark 10,560 9.47 
			 Merton & Wandsworth 7,752 6.34 
			 North East 17,271 12.81 
			 South West 10,728 7.30 
			 West Central 11,290 9.58 
			  
			 Total 161,972 9.27 
		
	
	The number of rejected ballot papers in each of the Greater London Assembly constituencies in the election of the additional members and the percentage of the total ballot papers issued is given in the table:
	
		
			  Number of rejected papers Percentage of ballot papers issued 
			 Barnet & Camden 6,630 4.91 
			 Bexley & Bromley 6,369 4.31 
			 Brent & Harrow 6,496 5.90 
			 City & East 8,050 6.84 
			 Croydon & Sutton 6,111 4.71 
			 Ealing & Hillingdon 6,771 5.18 
			 Enfield and Haringey 6,281 5.27 
			 Greenwich & Lewisham 4,981 4.72 
			 Havering & Redbridge 6,381 5.39 
			 Lambeth & Southwark 5,168 4.63 
			 Merton & Wandsworth 6,980 5.70 
			 North East 6,789 5.03 
			 South West 5,542 3.77 
			 West Central 5,593 4.74 
			  
			 Total 88,142 5.04 
		
	
	These figures reflect the fact that a large number of voters decided to leave parts of their ballot papers blank.
	For the European parliamentary elections in 1999 London was a single region. There were 4,320 spoilt ballot papers representing 0.38 per cent of all ballot papers issued.
	Figures for local elections are not held centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
	The number of rejected ballot papers in each constituency in Greater London at the 1997 general election and the percentage of the total ballot papers issued is given in the table:
	
		
			 Constituency Number of rejected papers Percentage of papers issued 
			 Barking 41 0.12 
			 Battersea 85 0.18 
			 Beckenham 59 0.11 
			 Bethnal Green & Bow 226 0.50 
			 Bexleyheath & Crayford 42 0.09 
			 Brent East 96 0.27 
			 Brent North 101 0.26 
			  
			 Brent South 134 0.39 
			 Brentford & Isleworth 91 0.16 
			 Bromley & Chislehurst 63 0.12 
			 Camberwell & Peckham 125 0.44 
			 Carshalton & Wallington 32 0.07 
			 Chingford & Woodford Green 63 0.14 
			 Chipping Barnet 67 0.13 
			 Cities of London & Westminster 109 0.27 
			 Croydon Central 55 0.10 
			 Croydon North 94 0.18 
			 Croydon South 71 0.13 
			 Dagenham 34 0.09 
			 Dulwich & West Norwood 20 0.04 
			 Ealing North 121 0.22 
			 Ealing, Acton & Shepherd's Bush 199 0.41 
			 Ealing, Southall 245 0.45 
			 East Ham 271 0.67 
			 Edmonton 78 0.17 
			 Eltham 73 0.17 
			 Enfield, North 63 0.13 
			 Enfield, Southgate 77 0.17 
			 Erith & Thamesmead 56 0.13 
			 Feltham & Heston 81 0.17 
			 Finchley & Golders Green 99 0.20 
			 Greenwich & Woolwich 86 0.21 
			 Hackney North &  Stoke Newington 178 0.55 
			 Hackney South & Shoreditch 182 0.54 
			 Hammersmith & Fulham 138 0.25 
			 Hampstead & Highgate 94 0.21 
			 Harrow East 113 0.20 
			 Harrow West 100 0.19 
			 Hayes & Harlington 51 0.12 
			 Hendon 76 0.15 
			 Holborn & St. Pancras 160 0.42 
			 Hornchurch 50 0.11 
			 Hornsey & Wood Green 133 0.26 
			 Ilford North 78 0.16 
			 Ilford South 134 0.27 
			 Islington North 124 0.34 
			 Islington South & Finsbury 136 0.38 
			 Kensington & Chelsea 123 0.33 
			 Kingston & Surbiton 58 0.10 
			 Lewisham East 91 0.24 
			 Lewisham West 81 0.22 
			 Lewisham Deptford 135 0.40 
			 Leyton & Wanstead 117 0.30 
			 Mitcham & Morden 61 0.13 
			 North Southwark & Bermondsey 106 0.26 
			 Old Bexley & Sidcup 45 0.09 
			 Orpington 75 0.12 
			 Poplar & Canning Town 134 0.34 
			 Putney 60 0.14 
			 Regent's Park &  Kensington North 120 0.25 
			 Romford 56 0.13 
			 Ruislip-Northwood 73 0.16 
			 Streatham 156 0.35 
			 Sutton & Cheam 54 0.11 
			 Tooting 94 0.20 
			 Tottenham 123 0.33 
			 Twickenham 94 0.16 
			 Upminster 34 0.08 
			 Uxbridge 39 0.09 
			 Vauxhall 226 0.58 
			 Walthamstow 122 0.30 
			 West Ham 99 0.29 
			 Wimbledon 52 0.11 
			  
			 Total rejected ballot papers 7,232 0.22

Lieutenant Governors of the Channel Islands

Lord Hoyle: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	(a) what were the previous occupations of the current Lieutenant Governors of the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man;
	(b) what are their salaries;
	(c) whether the posts are advertised;
	(d) what is the cost of making these appointments; and
	(e) what criteria are applied in the selection process.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The current Lieutenant Governor of the Bailiwick of Jersey is a retired general. The post of Lieutenant Governor of the Bailiwick of Guernsey is vacant at the moment but the previous incumbent was a retired vice-admiral. The incoming Lieutenant Governor is a lieutenant general. The Lieutenant Governor of the Isle of Man was formerly a diplomat.
	The salary for the Jersey and Guernsey posts is £67,815. The salary for the Isle of Man post is £53,273.
	All three posts have been advertised.
	The costs of advertising the posts was £26,127. It is not possible to identify separately other administrative costs falling within the appointment making process.
	The advertisements make it clear that applicants should have a distinguished record of service to the Crown and that they should also: have personal authority and the ability to command respect in discharging the role of Her Majesty's personal representative; be diplomatic, tactful and lucid communicators both to the islands and to Her Majesty's Government; and have the ability to play a leading role in the community life of the islands.

Mr Mike Tyson: Entry Clearance

Lord Graham of Edmonton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will make a decision to Mr Mike Tyson's application for entry clearance.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My right honourable friend the Home Secretary has today informed Mr Tyson that he will be granted entry clearance for a single visit of three weeks' duration strictly for the purpose of a boxing match in Scotland on 24 June 2000.
	The decision to grant entry clearance has been taken in accordance with Rule 320 (18) of the United Kingdom Immigration Rules which requires that admission will not normally be given to those with criminal convictions for relatively serious offences unless it can be justified for strong compassionate reasons, but also bearing in mind the residual discretion which my right honourable friend the Home Secretary has under the rule.
	In reaching a decision, my right honourable friend the Home Secretary took note of the fact that Mr Tyson has relevant convictions for the purposes of the application of this Rule. I also noted that there are recent allegations of an assault on an employee of a nightclub in Las Vegas, but we understand this is still under investigation. He also took into account the views expressed by the public about Mr Tyson visiting the United Kingdom.
	My right honourable friend the Home Secretary did not consider that there were strong compassionate reasons which would justify admission in Mr Tyson's case for the purpose of the rule. However, he concluded that there were other exceptional circumstances which justified his entry to the country for the purpose of participating in the boxing match. His decision took account of the following factors: that Mr Tyson's behaviour on his previous visit to the United Kingdom was satisfactory; that any risk to the public to which his criminal convictions and the other allegations referred to above might be relevant, would be minimised by the circumstances of his proposed visit i.e. his high media profile, the presence of his trainers and other supporting entourage, and the limited duration of his visit; and that a refusal to permit entry would result in a loss of economic benefit to the United Kingdom, and in particular to the areas in which engagements took place, and would not enhance the United Kingdom's standing as a venue for major sporting events.
	My right honourable friend the Home Secretary also took account of the fact that Rule 320(18) currently operates in an inconsistent manner in that those in the public eye whose convictions are known are more likely to be caught by its provisions.

Immigration Rules: Paragraph 320(18)

Lord Tomlinson: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made on the review of paragraph 320(18) of the Immigration Rules.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My right honourable friend the Home Secretary has today published a consultation document which details the consideration given to this matter and the changes proposed. A copy of the paper has been placed in the Library. Comments on the document are invited by 20 June 2000 and should be addressed to:
	Susan Wale,
	European Directorate,
	Room 1212, Apollo House,
	36 Wellesley Road,
	Croydon CR9 3RR.

Prison Service: Key Performance Indicators

Lord Tomlinson: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will publish the results achieved by the Prison Service on each of its key performance indicators in 1999-2000.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The Prison Service key performance indicators (KPI) results for 1999-2000 are given in the table. Data are provisional and subject to validation by prisons.
	
		
			 KPI Target Actual 
			 Category A escapes NIL NIL 
			 Escapes from prisons and prison escorts,  expressed as a proportion of average  population 0.05% 0.059% 
			 Escapes from contracted escorts, expressed as a  ratio per prisoners handled less than 1:20,000 1:22,251 
			 Assault rate (% of average population) 9% 9.9% 
			 Rate of positive random mandatory drug tests  (MDT) 18.5% 14.4% 
			 % of the population held two to a cell designed for one (Doubling) 18% 18.5% 
			 Average purposeful activity hours 24 hours 23.2 hours 
			 Total Accredited Offending behaviour  Programme completions (OBPs) 3,600 4,478 
			 Sex Offender Treatment Programmes (SOTPs) 700 586 
			 Cost per Uncrowded prisoner place £26,208 £25,567 
			 Cost per prisoner £27,392 £25,567 
			 Average working days lost to staff sickness 12.5 13.3 
			 % of public correspondence replied within 20  working days 95% 93.6%

HM Prison Blantyre House

Lord Mayhew of Twysden: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In what circumstances were doors to the chaplain's offices in HM Prison Blantyre House smashed open when found to be locked during a search of the prison in May; and what other damage was done to the premises and movable property caused in that search, specifying the damage.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The search teams were unable to locate the keys to a number of doors including the chaplain's offices, a locked room in the healthcare centre, the farm building and one room in the print shop. Because the effectiveness of the search would be undermined if it were not comprehensive, the governor in charge of the search operation authorised forced entry. Eleven doors and seven frames sustained minor damage to a total value of £500.

HM Prison Blantyre House

Lord Mayhew of Twysden: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	For how long Mr McLennan-Murray had been governor of HM Prison Blantyre House before his removal in May.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: Since October 1996.

HM Prison Blantyre House

Lord Mayhew of Twysden: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the date of the most recent inspection of HM Prison Blantyre House by H M Inspector of Prisons; and when his report was published, or when they expect it to be published.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The last inspection of Blantyre House took place on 21-25 January this year. No publication date for the report has yet been set.
	Under the protocol on the publication of inspection reports, the Prison Service is given the opportunity to check the report in draft for any factual inaccuracies. The Prison Service received the draft report on 24 March and the Director-General wrote to the Chief Inspector on 18 April raising a number of points.

HM Prison Blantyre House

Lord Mayhew of Twysden: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	During the recent prison search carried out at HM Prison Blantyre House, how many officers from outside the prison were brought in; and how much longer did the search continue after representatives of the board of visitors were told by the Governor, newly installed that day, that the search was complete and that they could leave the prison.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: Sixty-two officer grades (prison officers, senior officers and principal officers) from other establishments were involved. These included 28 officers in specialist control and restraint teams who were primarily on hand in case of any indiscipline on the part of prisoners. In the event they were not required for this role and were redeployed to expedite the completion of the search.
	The governor did not tell the representatives of the board of visitors the search was complete. At about 01.15 hours, they discussed the progress of the operation with the governor. They noted that it was proceeding smoothly, calmly and with good humour and that there were no signs of disorder. The governor agreed with their assessment. They decided to leave the establishment, having been assured by the governor that he would contact them should there be any change in the situation. The search finished at 04.50 hours.

Detention of Kashmiri Leaders

Lord Ahmed: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to raise the question of 22 Kashmiri leaders who are currently being held in prison without charge by the Indian Government.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary discussed the detention of members of the All Party Hurriyat Conference with the Indian Government during his visit to India in April. We have welcomed the release of some of the members. We have urged the Indian authorities to review the cases of those members who remain in detention.

UK Membership of EEA

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 8 May (WA 202), whether the United Kingdom would remain a member of the European Economic Area if it were to withdraw from the European Union.[HL2403].

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The EEA operates as a mechanism for applying the single market acquis to the EFTA states. The UK is an EEA member by virtue of being an EU member state. There is no provision in the EEA Agreement as to what status an EU member state would have under the Agreement if it chose to leave the EU.

Austria: Refusal of Bilateral Discussions

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 8 May (WA 202), whether they will list the members of the United Nations, other than Austria, in respect of whose Ministers the United Kingdom currently has a policy of refusing bilateral discussions.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Austria is the only member of the United Nations with which, other than as part of an EU Common Position, we do not have bilateral ministerial discussions although we maintain diplomatic relations.

EU Directives and Legislation

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will list by country the number of European Union directives, laws and regulations which have been implemented in each of the last three years for which figures have been calculated.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Information on the implementation of directives, by country, is available in the Commission's Annual Report on Monitoring the Application of Community Law. Information on the number of all legislative acts is provided in the Commission's General Report on the Activities of the European Union, also an annual report. These reports are available in the Library of the House.

Governors' Salaries

Lord Hoyle: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In which cases they make additional payments to ensure that the salaries of Governors appointed by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office are appropriate for senior members of the diplomatic service.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The salaries of the Governors of Bermuda and the Cayman Islands are paid direct by the local governments. The salaries of all other Governors are paid by the FCO in London. In some cases, such as Gibraltar, the government concerned makes a significant payment to the FCO towards the salary cost.
	Varying levels of allowance are also paid to Governors by the FCO to compensate for the additional cost of maintaining overseas a standard of living comparable to that in the UK. Salaries and allowances are based on the standard terms and conditions of service applied to all FCO personnel serving overseas.

Zimbabwe: Alleged Arms Imports from Russia

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will consult the government of Russia about reports in the Zimbabwe Independent of 5 May that military equipment, including 21,000 AK-47s, were recently imported into Zimbabwe from Russia; and whether they consider that any exports of weapons to Zimbabwe under present conditions constitute a breach of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe's Principles Governing Conventional Arms Transfers of November 1993.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: We have no collateral for the report of the export referred to in the article. We will be drawing Russia's attention to our national embargo on Zimbabwe and asking it to take similar action.

Tourism Staff Accommodation: Tax Position

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the report of the proceedings at the Tourism Summit held on 1 March, what steps they will take to explore the disincentive to recruitment caused by the tax position of staff accommodation commonly provided in the tourism industry

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Following the Tourism Summit we called for a fuller report from the hospitality industry and are now considering the strength of their case. Any decisions about taxation will, of course, be for the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Tourism (Sleeping Accommodation Price Display) Order 1997

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which organisations they will consult about options for modernising the Tourism (Sleeping Accommodation Price Display) Order 1997; when that consultation will take place; and when they will report on the results of that consultation.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The full list of organisations to be consulted has not been finalised yet, but will include the British Tourist Authority, English Tourism Council, British Hospitality Association and the National Council of Hotel Associations, whose views on who else should be consulted are to be sought. Once the extent of the consultation exercise is established, a timetable will be prepared and announced next month.

Tourism and Hospitality Contact Group

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which departments will be represented by officials on the Tourism and Hospitality Contact Group; and on how many occasions they will meet during the forthcoming year.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Tourism and Hospitality Group will include representatives from the following departments: Agriculture, Fisheries and Food; Cabinet Office (Regulatory Impact Unit); Customs & Excise; Employment and Education; Environment, Transport and the Regions; Home Office; Trade and Industry; Scottish Executive; Office of the National Assembly for Wales; and the Economic Development Department, Northern Ireland. Representatives from the British Tourist Authority and the English Tourism Council will also be included. The group is expected to meet at least three or four times in the coming year.

Tourism and Ethnic Diversity

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which departments and which bodies they will consult as a consequence of their undertaking given at the Tourism Summit to investigate the tourism potential of the United Kingdom's ethnic and cultural diversity.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: We understand that the Home Office, which is leading on this action point from the summit, intends to talk to groups that represent ethnic minorities and cultural interests, such as the Muslim Council of Britain and the Commission for Racial Equality. It will also be talking to leading organisations in the tourism industry such as the British Tourist Authority.

May Day Demonstrations: Protection of Monuments

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Royal Parks Agency and English Heritage acted against police advice in not boarding up the statue of Sir Winston Churchill in Parliament Square and the Cenotaph in preparation for the May Day demonstrations in London; and on what date and in what form such police advice was given to the two agencies concerned.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Royal Parks Agency have advised me that on 6 April the Royal Parks Constabulary attended a briefing by the Metropolitan Police at which they were informed of the demonstrations planned for 1 May and advised that damage might occur to the statues on Parliament Square, including the statue of Sir Winston Churchill. A week later the Royal Parks Constabulary received a telephone call from the Metropolitan Police advising that the statues in Parliament Square be boarded up. The Royal Parks Agency took the view that to board up the statues would draw attention to them and that the hoarding could be used as weapons by demonstrators in the event of a riot. The Metropolitan Police were informed of this decision at a meeting on 26 April where it was confirmed that others had also decided not to board up statues.
	English Heritage has advised me that it is clear that it did not act against police advice. On 17 April, English Heritage received telephone advice from the Metropolitan Police that, in view of the potential for vandalism during the likely demonstrations over the May Day bank holiday, English Heritage might wish to consider erecting protective hoarding around the Cenotaph. Preparations to that end were begun by English Heritage and its consultants, EC Harris. On 20 April, EC Harris, acting under English Heritage's instructions, sought further advice and attended a briefing meeting with the police. Advice at this stage was that hoarding around the Cenotaph could exacerbate the security problem. It could draw attention to the monument, provide a potential hiding place for bombs, and be used for ammunition by rioters. English Heritage's consultants clearly understood that an additional police presence would be allocated to the Cenotaph in addition to the security measures already in place. On the basis of what English Heritage saw as clear police advice, it then stood down the contingency planning for protective hoarding around the Cenotaph.

Goods Vehicles: Excise Duty

Earl Attlee: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Vehicle Excise Duty rate for goods vehicles is set to take account of the annual mileage likely to be covered.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Chancellor of the Exchequer takes into account a number of factors when considering the apppropriate rates of Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) for different goods vehicles. In general, these do not include estimate of the average annual mileage undertaken by different lorries, since that will vary according to the types of journey undertaken by a lorry, not according to the type of lorry used.
	However, there are a number of other goods vehicles which attract a concessionary rate of VED because they are primarily used off the public road, including a range of goods vehicles used in agriculture and construction. There is also an exemption from VED for goods vehicles used to travel less than 1.5 kilometres between any two different parts of land occupied by the same person for purposes relating to agriculture, horticulture and forestry.

Committee on Standards in Public Life: Defamatory Evidence

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Bassam of Brighton on 4 May (WA 189), what criteria will be applied, and upon whose determination, to assess whether evidence relating to standards of conduct in the House of Lords submitted to the Committee on Standards in Public Life is defamatory.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: This will be a matter for the Committee on Standards in Public Life to determine in the light of the general law. The committee, with appropriate legal advice, reviews all evidence submitted to it so as to ensure as far as reasonably possible that it does not re-publish material which might consitute a libel.

Human Rights Convention and Sub Judice Rule

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked the Leader of the House:
	What means are available to provide an effective remedy (in accordance with Article 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights) for a breach of the right to free expression (guaranteed by Article 10 of the Convention), resulting from the rules of the House on discussion of matters sub judice, where such rules authorise or require breaches of Article 10, or where their application creates an unnecessary or disproportionate restriction upon the freedom to discuss active civil proceedings or appellate proceedings.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: Paragraph (2) of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights allows that the exercise of the freedoms under that article may be subject to restrictions for various reasons including maintenance of the authority and impartiality of the judiciary. The sub judice rule is such a restriction. Article IX of the Bill of Rights prohibits the UK courts from impeaching or questioning proceedings in Parliament. If a member of the House were to consider that the sub judice rule created an unnecessary or disproportionate restriction on the rights of Members, he or she could ask the Leader of the House to propose that it be waived in a particular case, or put forward a Motion to modify the Resolution of 11 May 2000.

Reserve Forces' Gulf Service:Attributable Benefits

Lord Morris of Castle Morris: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether members of the reserve forces who served in the Gulf are entitled to attributable pensions benefits.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: Attributable benefits for Reserve Service were introduced in 1980, and the regulations are contained in the Naval and Marine Pay and Pensions (Non-Effective Benefits and Family Pension) Order 1999, the Army Pay Warrant 1977, and the Queen's Regulations for the Royal Air Force. It has been the practice since 1980 to award attributable benefits only where members of the reserve forces are medically discharged from the reserves at an end of a period of active duty. During periods of recalled service for operations, individuals in the regular reserve forces could claim benefits only if they were medically discharged at the point of demobilisation. We have now taken legal advice, which suggests that Army reservists are, under current regulations, eligible to claim attributable benefits if they are medically discharged from the reserve at any time. Our legal advisers have also identified some anomalies in the regulations for the other Services.
	We therefore propose for the future that all members of the volunteer reserves and regular reserves should be eligible for attributable benefits if they are medically discharged from the reserve forces at any time for reasons attributable to reserve service. The existing anomalies in the regulations, under which reservists are treated differently depending on which Service they come from, will be removed. We shall re-examine claims from Gulf Reservists under the interpretation of the regulations we now believe to be correct.We shall also consider any new claims.

Pyridostigmine Bromide

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What assessment they have made of the RAND Corporation report entitled A Review of the Scientific Literature as it Pertains to Gulf War Illnesses, volume II: Pyridostigmine Bromide.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The RAND report, which is a comprehensive compilation of published literature on pyridostigmine bromide (PB) and its relationship to Gulf Veterans' Illnesses (GVI), has now been carefully reviewed and a written assessment of the report has been produced. We are placing a copy of this assessment in the Library of the House.
	The RAND report does not present any new work on pyridostigmine bromide. It concentrates on several hypotheses of how PB might be the cause of GVI and to a lesser extent discusses the effectiveness of PB. Although a number of theories have been identified, they have not, in our view, been critically evaluated and there is no differentiation between the credibility and value of the various pieces of research. The report gives no guidance as to which of the various hypotheses is worthy of further investigation or for the prioritisation of further research. The approach and methodology adopted for this review do not advance the debate on whether PB is possibly linked to illness in Gulf veterans.

Gulf War: Biological Warfare Detection Unit

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What assessment they have made on the role of the 1 Field Laboratory Unit that operated a biological warfare agent detection facility during the 1990-1991 Gulf conflict and the work of that unit in detecting biological warfare agents.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The 1997 "Gulf Veterans Illnesses: A New Beginning" policy statement set out a number of commitments to help address the health concerns of Gulf Veterans. One of these commitments was to review specific incidents of suggested biological warfare exposures and the activities of 1 Field Laboratory Unit. As part of this commitment, we are today publishing a paper entitled A Review of the Activities of the 1 Field Laboratory Unit and Suggested Biological Warfare Agent Detections During Operation Granby.
	As a result of our review of the available information we assess that UK troops were not subject to attack by or exposed to biological warfare agents during the Gulf conflict. There were alarms on some detectors, many of which were recognised to be false by the system operators at the time. On one occasion, a biological substance was detected and samples returned to the UK for testing. The tests concluded that this was not caused by a biological warfare agent. Our review re-examined this incident and concludes that the evidence suggests that the detection was caused by natural biological material.

Nitrochemie: Ordnance Products

Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether there was any evidence in recent trials that shells now manufactured by Nitrochemie are damaging the gun barrels of the Challenger 2 tank; and, if so, what.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The Ministry of Defence is not aware of any damage being caused to Challenger 2 gun barrels during trials of charges manufactured by the RO Defence supplier, Nitrochemie.

Nitrochemie: Ordnance Products

Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many people were treated for skin exposure to nitro-glycerine leaking from shells manufactured by Nitrochemie in Germany, which is planned to replace Bishopton in Scotland as the manufacturer of these shells.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The Ministry of Defence has no evidence or information on an alleged leakage of nitro-glycerine from shells.

Nitrochemie: Ordnance Products

Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What were the results of recent tests of the propellant for Charm 3 training rounds which are now manufactured by Nitrochemie in Germany in place of Bishopton in Scotland.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The Ministry of Defence has no contracts with Nitrochemie for Charm 3 training rounds. The contractor for these rounds is RO Defence, who we understand are assessing options for the supply of propellant and combustible charge cases following their intended closure of RO Bishopton. The conduct and outcome of this work is a matter for RO Defence.

Joint Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Regiment

Baroness Hilton of Eggardon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will make a statement on the long-term location of the Joint Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Regiment currently based at RAF Honington. (123004)

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The Joint Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Regiment, which was established as a joint initiative in April 1999, following recommendations arising from the Strategic Defence Review, will be permanently based at RAF Honington.
	The regiment was established at RAF Honington as a successful joint initiative in April last year, following the recommendations of the Strategic Defence Review, and was fully operational by December. The regiment's operational capability will comprise nuclear, biological and chemical detection, reconnaissance and survey, and will combine these aspects with expertise in decontamination techniques. This is a critical enabling capability--and the regiment will be invaluable in reducing the risk to our Armed Forces who deploy in dangerous areas like the Gulf.

Spanish Veterinary Surgeons and the Meat Hygiene Service

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the quality of Spanish veterinary surgeons whom the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons is, by European Union law, required to register is satisfactory; and what effect the employment of Spanish veterinary surgeons has upon the quality of service offered by the Meat Hygiene Service to abattoir owners and managers in the United Kingdom.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The Veterinary Training Directive, 78/1027/EEC, lays down the content and quality of veterinary undergraduate training in recognised establishments in the Europen Union, with the aim of ensuring that all those graduating from such establishments are trained to an adequate standard.
	In the United Kingdom, the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) is obliged to register veterinary surgeons who have qualified from such recognised educational establishments. This is a reciprocal arrangement required by Directive 78/10126/EEC, on the mutual recognition of qualifications in veterinary medicine.
	Once a Spanish veterinary surgeon is registered by the RCVS, and is practicing veterinary surgery in the United Kingdom, his conduct and behaviour is governed by the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 (as amended). The Act gives disciplinary powers to the RCVS. In addition, the College publishes a Guide to Professional Conduct, most recently revised in March 2000. This document provides guidance to veterinary surgeons on professional and ethical issues.
	We are advised by the Food Standards Agency that the use of Spanish veterinary surgeons by the Meat Hygiene Service has no effect upon the quality of service it provides to abattoir owners and managers in Great Britain. Apart from the requirement for such veterinarians to be registered with the RCVS, the overriding criterion for designation as an Official Veterinary Surgeon (OVS) with the Meat Hygiene Service is the ability and competence of the individuals concerned, not the country of origin. All qualified veterinary surgeons wishing to be designated as OVSs must first successfully complete the MHS OVS course.

Variant CJD: Discarded Tonsil Samples

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On what basis 1,000 tonsil samples were discarded before being tested for new-variant CJD; and what procedures were followed to make sure that infection with new-variant CJD did not result in the sample being discarded.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: A significant proportion of the samples was unsuitable for analysis because they were found by scientists to be damaged or otherwise of insufficient quality to enable analysis to be carried out. At the time the samples were taken, during routine surgery, there had been no intention of subjecting them to further analysis. The decision to set up the study of these appendices and tonsils came later. Discovery of any abnormal prion protein indicative of variant-CJD in those suitable for testing would have been reported.

Variant CJD: Discarded Tonsil Samples

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why, when they are prepared to release the results of testing tonsil samples for new-variant CJD before peer review and use a test which has not been fully validated, they insist on waiting for peer review before publishing other crucial information.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The Government do not in general publish the results of research findings unless they have first been peer reviewed. Preliminary data from the survey of human tonsil/appendix tissue currently under way were evaluated at a recent meeting of a scientific committee chaired by Professor Borysiewicz of the University of Wales College of Medicine. Experienced scientists operating in the relevant field of research into variant CJD are members of this committee and were present at this meeting. The preliminary findings were seen as helping to increase our knowledge about variant CJD. There was a very high level of public interest in this study. Following that meeting, an announcement about the results was made on 28th April 2000 by the Department of Health (ref. 2000/0250).